Ranger83 Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 RAV4 owners seem to average 22-24 mpg and the numbers for the 2.4L I4 seem to be similar to the 3.5L V6. This is better than the mpg I was getting in my 00 Legacy. If you were getting less than 22-24mpg with your Legacy you made a good move ggetting rid of it as something was wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
otis Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 the new rav4 will hurt the crv more than it will hurt subaru. no one looks at a subaru unless they already own one or have a friend with one. everyone in this market wants a small/mid-size suv and immediately overlook the wagon alternative toward the crv, rav4, escape, tribute, etc. subaru will remain excellent at niche status. subaru will probably end up hurting itself with their vehicle placements. the tribeca is on par with a lexus rx, but, like i said, its overlooked by people who want the badge. that and most will not pay 38 grand for a subaru. everybody complains the tribeca is a 38k car- that's the top of the line leather, dvd, nav, etc. I personally think it competes quite well. what other car can you get AWD, 3 rows, DVD, NAV, leather, and (semi) luxury ride? The MDX, Escalade, MB RL class, etc for a good $8-20k more. there are cars like the pilot (cant get both nav and dvd), murano (only 2 rows), or highlander (no dvd) for "comparable" prices. you can get all those features in the sienna, but it costs $40k+. I did find ONE vehicle that matches the specs of the high end tribeca- the Chevy Trailblazer. FOr $35, you can get leather, 3 rows, awd, dvd, nav- probably much less if GM does another "employee pricing" gimick. otherwise the tribeca is a "low 30's" car like friendlyjacek found out. DOes it compete with a rav4 priced $10g lower? depends on what you're looking for. Toyota is in the middle of "raising the bar" with it's unibody suv's- the rav4 is now in highlander teritory (which i think is a better comparison for the tribeca). rumors have next year's highlander being bigger to differentiate it from the rav4 (simialar to Honda Pilot size). Being a forester owner, I think subaru has to bump up the size of this car to compete with rav4 and crv. it doesn't need a 3rd row, but more elbow room. let the OBS fill the small suv/wagon niche. if this current rav4 was available 3 yrs ago, i would have seriously considered it over the forester. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fastwgn286 Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 everybody complains the tribeca is a 38k car- that's the top of the line leather, dvd, nav, etc. I personally think it competes quite well. what other car can you get AWD, 3 rows, DVD, NAV, leather, and (semi) luxury ride? The MDX, Escalade, MB RL class, etc for a good $8-20k more. there are cars like the pilot (cant get both nav and dvd), murano (only 2 rows), or highlander (no dvd) for "comparable" prices. you can get all those features in the sienna, but it costs $40k+. I did find ONE vehicle that matches the specs of the high end tribeca- the Chevy Trailblazer. FOr $35, you can get leather, 3 rows, awd, dvd, nav- probably much less if GM does another "employee pricing" gimick. otherwise the tribeca is a "low 30's" car like friendlyjacek found out. DOes it compete with a rav4 priced $10g lower? depends on what you're looking for. Toyota is in the middle of "raising the bar" with it's unibody suv's- the rav4 is now in highlander teritory (which i think is a better comparison for the tribeca). rumors have next year's highlander being bigger to differentiate it from the rav4 (simialar to Honda Pilot size). Being a forester owner, I think subaru has to bump up the size of this car to compete with rav4 and crv. it doesn't need a 3rd row, but more elbow room. let the OBS fill the small suv/wagon niche. if this current rav4 was available 3 yrs ago, i would have seriously considered it over the forester. yeah, i know the 38k figure is top of the line, but lots of people are like lemmings, they like every option box ticked, even if it will not be used. then they get sticker shock and settle for a less heavily optioned car. but everyone likes the badge on the back, and few appreciate the vehicle for being the vehicle that it is, like us on here. subaru just isn't mainstream compared to the other auto manufacturers. if you want AWD, subaru is the place to go. but, not many care what wheels are driven, just so long as it looks cool in front of the grocery store and school building. i applaud subaru for being where they are. they make cars that compromise nothing, reliable, and drive amazingly well (my outback can take on a sports car through the bends, any day). i think the bigger verison of the forester will continue to be the outback, and those who need a larger forester need to look there. their lines are very good compared to other manufacturers that are in trouble (pontiac has two converibles that look about the same, but why?) the rav4 is still a toyota, which are pretty boring. the crv is a honda, and therefore, everyone has one. subarus are brillant, different, and always leave a smile on your face. but, you gotta do whatcha gotta do.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
friendly_jacek Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 If you were getting less than 22-24mpg with your Legacy you made a good move ggetting rid of it as something was wrong. It was not a good move per se as the car was totalled in the process. But you are right, the mpg was not up to the par. I did all the things possible to improve it to no avail (O2 sensor, synthetic fluids, OBD2 scanner for sensor problems, etc, etc). Another reason I'm glad I switched is that according to MSN.com both engine and tranny (AT) had significant fatal problems in 2000 MY and any reader of this forum can attest to that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.